Introduction: Throughout my training in psychiatry, I underwent a profound shift in my scientific perspective, transitioning from a constrained, biomedical framework to a more expansive and pluralistic approach that acknowledges the diverse legitimate ways of comprehending and addressing mental suffering.
Methods: Drawing from my personal experiences, I encountered various methodologies for conceptualizing mental health issues, spanning from humanistic frameworks to diagnostic approaches and medication. Notably, I found the latter to be less beneficial. Working within a medical environment that espoused a narrow understanding instigated a sense of cognitive dissonance, leading to a scientific crisis in my own professional development. Driven by this dissonance, I immersed myself in the realm of the philosophy of psychiatry.
Results: Philosophical assumptions form the bedrock of any scientific discipline, constituting the agreed-upon "rules" within the scientific community. These assumptions encompass beliefs about the nature of the world (ontology), our capacity to understand it (epistemology), and the proper practice of science (norms). The pivotal moment for me was not merely uncovering these assumptions but recognizing that other scientific fields had opted for alternative assumptions, thus fostering diverse approaches to conceptualizing mental health and distress.
Discussion: The prevailing dominance of the medical model in mental health traces back to a narrow-minded education ingrained in the training of medical doctors. I suggest that alternative models of mental health are equally valid and warrant inclusion in a pluralistic mental health system. Embracing a pluralistic approach, characterized by epistemic humility among healthcare professionals, may better serve the process of recovery. This approach nurtures individuals' journeys to find meaning in their personal experiences and construct narratives that empower and heal.